Literary Theory

Series 2: Handout #5

 

Michel Foucault, the personification of “Theory”; its other patron saint, after Derrida.  He ties together Marx, Nietzsche, (rejects Freud and Sartre), and Derrida, builds on foundations laid by Gramsci, Althusser (his mentor—as if you couldn’t tell, ISAs and RSAs aplenty in Foucault), and he is the #1 influence on New Historicism and, probably, contemporary theory.  His BIG IDEA (well, it’s Nietzsche’s too): it’s all about POWER.  Remember Bentham’s panopticon? 

“Discipline and Punish” (1975): They left out the really shocking introduction (a description of a brutal execution), which covers the origins of the disciplinary system—the carceral network—of the modern world: the mechanisms of the penal system (like other forms of systematic power) grew by “slow, continuous, imperceptible gradation” (vast regime of panoptic, public surveillance via institutions); disciplinary institutions that define with licit and illicit, the sane and the insane, with very precise gradients; these institutions create a whole system of professional classes who see themselves as serving society, humane, etc.  MAIN IDEA: Power is enhanced when it becomes pervasive, unnoticed, professionalized, and defined as humane.  Love is power, baby.  And it’s bigger than the both of us. 

Q. Is “Literature” a scam perpetrated on the ignorant for the enhancement of various discourses of power?  Is the ultimate purpose of your literary education to be taught to transcend such absurdities and/or learn how to use the “aura” of the literary to extend the discourses of power in which you are enmeshed?  In other words, to know where your power lies and not be confused about it with a lot of sentimental rubbish about Truth and Love and all that. 

Q. What is your job as a teacher?  Or a writer?  What do you THINK it is?

BIG Q. Does Foucault allow the possibility of resistance to power?  Does “power” become some kind of transcendent signifier for him?  A substitute for the deity?  What about plain old entropy?  Don’t systems break down?  What caused the fall of Rome?  Is there a base that makes power part of the superstructure?

 

Q. Want to try some more new historicist contextualizations?